El Jueves, 30 de Octubre de 2008, Robert Helvie escribió: > It is obvious on a render that a river and road don't connect, but is there > some necessity for a bridge due to (future?) rendering conditions or > possible routing software?
There is no "need" to put the bridge, but it would be nice to have it anyway. > But my real question about naming is, in Korea, major > intersections/junctions are used to provide directions to people and > consequently ARE often named. Do you think I should go ahead and name > intersections? If so, in a general opinion, what would be the best way to > do that? A separate named POI, or should I just actually name the > intersection node? Would a named node be useful to routing software? Hmmm. That's a good one. AFAIK, some other south-asian countries also don't have names for the streets, and landmarks are used. I think the indian OSM guys were researching into some kind of method for "landmark-based navigation". You should try and contact them for ideas about that. On the other hand, you can also be bold and propose a tag for named crossings. Maybe tag the nodes as junction=crossing and name=whatever (definitely name the nodes, and know that naming them would be useful than not naming them). Maybe write to the general mailing list about it. Cheers, -- ---------------------------------- Iván Sánchez Ortega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sexagenaria: Ciencia que se encarga del estudio del Sexo.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ newbies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/newbies
